Patent: 10,830,727

Summary for Patent: 10,830,727

Title:	Electrode and use thereof
Abstract:	The application relates to an electrode for use in the electrochemical detection of a target species, wherein the electrode has a planar surface disposed on which are probe molecules that are capable of binding selectively to the target species, wherein the electrode, prior to binding of the probe molecules with the target species, has an electron transfer resistance per area of the electrode of from 10 megaohms cmto 95 megaohms cm.
Inventor(s):	Davis Jason, Bueno Paulo Roberto
Application Number:	US15803267
Patent Claims:	see list of patent claims

Analyzing the Claims and Patent Landscape of United States Patent 10,830,727

Introduction

The United States patent system is a cornerstone of innovation policy, designed to incentivize the creation of new and useful inventions by granting inventors exclusive rights for a limited time. This analysis will delve into the specifics of United States Patent 10,830,727, examining its claims, the broader patent landscape, and the implications of current patent policies.

Overview of the U.S. Patent System

The U.S. patent system is grounded in the U.S. Constitution, which grants Congress the power to "promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries"[1].

Key Components of Patent Law

To be patentable, an invention must meet several criteria:

• Usefulness: The invention must be operable and provide some tangible benefit[1].
• Novelty: The invention must not be fully anticipated by prior patents, publications, or other state of the art knowledge[1].
• Nonobviousness: The invention must not have been readily within the ordinary skills of a competent artisan at the time it was made[1].
• Patentable Subject Matter: The invention must claim subject matter that is eligible for patent protection[2].

The Patent in Question: United States Patent 10,830,727

While the specific details of Patent 10,830,727 are not provided in the sources, we can analyze it within the context of general patent law and current trends.

Claim Analysis

Patent claims are the heart of any patent, defining the scope of protection granted to the inventor. Here are some key points to consider:

Claim Scope and Specificity

Claims must be clear and definite to avoid ambiguity. The scope of the claims determines what is protected and what is not. Overly broad claims may be challenged for lack of specificity or for covering ineligible subject matter[2].

Patent Subject Matter Eligibility

The patent must claim subject matter that is eligible for patent protection. This is a critical area of contention, especially in fields like software and biotechnology, where the line between eligible and ineligible subject matter can be blurry. The Alice/Mayo test is often used to determine if a patent claim is directed to an abstract idea or natural phenomenon and whether it contains an "inventive concept" that transforms the nature of the claim[2].

The Broader Patent Landscape

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) of 2011 introduced significant changes to U.S. patent law, including the creation of the PTAB. This board hears administrative challenges to the validity of issued patents, such as Inter Partes Review (IPR) and Post-Grant Review (PGR). These procedures are designed to improve patent quality and reduce unwarranted litigation costs by providing a faster and cheaper alternative to federal court litigation[2].

Criticisms and Challenges

PTAB has faced criticism for making it too easy to challenge patents, creating uncertainty in patent rights and potentially stifling innovation. Some argue that PTAB's processes undermine the presumption of validity that comes with issued patents, leading to a "patent death squad" effect[2].

Equity in Innovation

Patent policy also involves equity considerations, ensuring that the benefits of innovation are accessible and that the system does not disproportionately favor certain groups. This includes addressing issues of patent quality, validity challenges, and the impact of patent policies on different stakeholders[1].

Current Issues and Concerns

Patent Quality

The quality of patents is a recurring concern. The Government Accountability Office (GAO) has recommended that the USPTO more consistently define and measure patent quality. USPTO has responded by developing correctness measures and compliance targets for patent examinations[4].

Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Standards

The eligibility of certain subject matter for patent protection remains a contentious issue. The USPTO has issued guidelines to help examiners determine whether a patent application seeks to claim ineligible subject matter, such as laws of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract ideas[2].

Industry-Specific Trends: Cybersecurity

Cybersecurity Innovations

The cybersecurity sector has seen a significant surge in patent applications, reflecting the growing need for innovative solutions to combat cyber threats. Since 2000, there have been over 2,269 cybersecurity patent applications filed, with the U.S. leading in filings, followed by international and Chinese applications[3].

Global Competition

Countries are competing fiercely in the cybersecurity innovation space. The U.S., with its large cybersecurity workforce, leads in patent filings. China, despite its high volume of patent applications, has faced criticism for the quality of its patents and has implemented stricter regulations to improve this[3].

Impact of Patent Policies on Innovation

Incentivizing Innovation

Patents are designed to incentivize innovation by providing inventors with a limited-time monopoly on their inventions. This allows them to recoup their investment and generate profits, as noted by Abraham Lincoln: "the patent system adds 'the fuel of interest to the fire of genius, in the discovery and production of new and useful things'"[1].

Balancing Rights and Public Interest

Patent policies must balance the rights of inventors with the broader public interest. This includes ensuring that patents do not stifle competition or hinder access to essential technologies. The social benefits of strong patent protection must outweigh any potential costs associated with weakened patent rights[1].

Key Takeaways

• Patent Claims: Clear and specific claims are crucial for defining the scope of protection.
• PTAB and Administrative Challenges: PTAB procedures offer a faster and cheaper alternative to federal court litigation but have faced criticism for undermining patent rights.
• Patent Quality: Ensuring high-quality patents is essential for maintaining trust in the patent system.
• Cybersecurity Innovations: The cybersecurity sector is a vibrant area of innovation, with significant investment in patent applications.
• Global Competition: Countries are competing to lead in innovation, with the U.S. currently at the forefront in cybersecurity.

FAQs

What is the primary purpose of the U.S. patent system?

The primary purpose of the U.S. patent system is to promote the progress of science and useful arts by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries.

How does the PTAB impact patent validity challenges?

The PTAB provides a faster and cheaper alternative to federal court litigation for challenging the validity of issued patents through procedures like IPR and PGR.

What are the key criteria for an invention to be patentable?

An invention must be useful, novel, nonobvious, and claim patentable subject matter to be eligible for a patent.

Why is patent quality a significant concern?

Ensuring high-quality patents is crucial for maintaining trust in the patent system and preventing unwarranted litigation costs.

How has the cybersecurity sector impacted patent filings?

The cybersecurity sector has seen a significant increase in patent applications, driven by the need for innovative solutions to combat growing cyber threats.

Sources

1. Congressional Research Service, "Patents and Innovation Policy," June 25, 2022.
2. Congressional Research Service, "The Patent Trial and Appeal Board and Inter Partes Review," May 28, 2024.
3. IS Decisions, "Cybersecurity Innovations And The Patent Landscape," November 21, 2023.
4. Government Accountability Office, "Intellectual Property: Patent Office Should Define Quality, Reassess Processes," June 30, 2016.
5. Wyatt, Tarrant & Combs, LLP, "Is Inter Partes Review Unconstitutional?" December 11, 2017.

Details for Patent 10,830,727

Applicant	Tradename	Biologic Ingredient	Dosage Form	BLA	Approval Date	Patent No.	Expiredate
Kedrion Biopharma Inc.	RYPLAZIM	plasminogen, human-tvmh	For Injection	125659	June 04, 2021	10,830,727	2037-11-03